TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (6) TMI 1171
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r brevity referred to as 'N.I. Act') and was sentenced accordingly. 2. The summary of the case of the complainant in the trial Court was that both the complainant and accused were known to each other for the past several years. Due to such well-acquaintance between them, the complainant entertained the request of the accused for a hand loan of a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs. Accordingly, in the first week of March 2007, in order to meet out the hard-pressing debts and other legal necessities of the accused, the complainant advanced a hand loan of a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs by cash. The accused had agreed to repay the said loan amount within six months. However, at the repeated request made by the complainant, the accused issued him a cheque bear....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2019, dismissed the appeal by confirming the judgment of conviction passed by the trial Court. It is against these judgments of conviction, the accused has preferred this revision petition. 7. The respondent is being represented by his learned counsel. 8. Records from the trial Court and Sessions Judge's Court pertaining to the matter were called for and the same are placed before the Court. 9. Though this matter is listed for admission, with the consent from both parties, the matter was taken up for arguments on main on merits. 10. Heard the arguments of learned counsel from both side. Perused the materials placed before this Court. 11. The only point that arises for my consideration is,- "Whether the impugned j....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....-5. 15. PW-1 was not cross-examined on the day when his examination-in-chief was recorded, however, admittedly on 20.11.2017, when the examination-in-chief of PW-1 was completed, till 23.07.2018, not less than eight adjournments were granted at the request of the accused to enable him to cross-examine PW-1. On 23.07.2018, the trial Court in the deposition sheet by recording that accused had remained absent and no exemption application was filed and that from 20.11.2017, since sufficient opportunities have been granted to the accused to cross-examine PW-1, but, the accused and his counsel since have remained absent, taken the cross-examination of PW-1 as 'Nil'. Thus, the evidence of PW-1 both oral and documentary remains undispute....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Sessions Judge's Court in Criminal Appeal No. 438/2019, wherein also he took a contention that he must be given an opportunity to cross-examine PW-1 and to lead his defence evidence. In that regard, in Paragraph-18 of its judgment, learned Sessions Judge has made the following observation: "18. In this appeal, appellant now submitting that, due to ill health, he was unable to cross-examine Pw.1 and unable to cross-examine himself as defence witness. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that, 8 dates were given in the trial court for cross-examination of Pw.1. From 17.2.2018 to 28.9.2018, trial court adjourned matter for cross-examination of Pw.1. All documents produced by the appellant relating to medical treatments are....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 19. The evidence of PW-1, which has remained un-denied, supported by the cheque at Ex.P-1 and the banker's endorsement at Ex.P-2, which shows that there was no sufficient balance in the account of the drawer/accused on the date when the cheque was presented for its realisation and also the copy of legal notice at Ex.P-3 and the postal acknowledgement at Ex.P-5, which further go to show that the complainant had demanded the payment of cheque amount from the accused within the statutory period, but, still the accused did not pay the cheque amount, would make it clear that the complainant has proved the alleged guilt against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. 20. It is analysing the evidence placed before them in their proper perspec....